Warning

Info

Table of Contents
Jawshu, CLS '24 |

2 0

Back to briefs

Bailey v. West

(1969)

Supreme Court of Rhode Island - 105 R.I. 61, 249 A.2d 414

tl;dr:

The defendant bought a lame horse; the horse was left with a farm owner who cared for the horse for four years and said the defendant was liable for costs. The defendant was not held liable because he did not form an implied contract with the farm owner.

Video Summary


Case Summary

In Bailey v. West, a 1969 Rhode Island Supreme Court case, a farm owner (Bailey) and a horse buyer (West) had a disagreement over a contract and quasi-contract. West had bought a defective racehorse and tried to return it to the seller but was refused. The horse ended up staying at Bailey's farm for four years, and Bailey billed West for the horse's care. However, West denied ownership and responsibility for the horse, so Bailey sued him.

The trial court ruled in favor of Bailey, saying there was an implied contract. After multiple appeals, the Rhode Island Supreme Court ultimately decided there was neither an implied contract nor a quasi-contract between Bailey and West.

To prove the existence of an implied contract, the court required proof of a mutual agreement and intent to promise without the need for verbal expressions. They found no evidence of such an agreement between the two parties. They also denied Bailey's claim of quasi-contract, requiring unjust enrichment of one party at another's expense, as West did not benefit from Bailey's services.

The decision in this case set strict standards for proving implied contracts and quasi-contracts in Rhode Island, underscoring that these legal concepts should not be used to assign liability without consent or benefit. Furthermore, it emphasized that cases involving implied contracts and quasi-contracts must have objective evidence of agreement or enrichment and not rely on personal expectations or assumptions.

ICRAIssue, Conclusion, Rule, Analysis for Bailey v. West

LSD+ exclusive

This content is exclusively for LSD+ users.

Sign up for LSD+ for full access to the Bailey v. West case brief summary.

Enjoy unlimited access with our 14-day free trial.

Facts & HoldingBailey v. West case brief facts & holding

Facts:Howard Bailey (plaintiff) alleged that Richard West (defendant) was indebted...

Holding:The court agrees with West’s contention that the trial judge...

LSD+ exclusive

This content is exclusively for LSD+ users.

Sign up for LSD+ for full access to the Bailey v. West case brief summary.

Enjoy unlimited access with our 14-day free trial.

DeepDiveHighlight a legal term to see the definition

Font size -+
Bailey v. West | Case Brief DeepDive
Majority opinion, author: Paolino, J.
Level 1
Click below 👇 to DeepDive

The plaintiff claims that the defendant owes him for services rendered in caring for a racehorse named "Bascom's Folly" from May 3, 1962, to July 3, 1966. The lower court found in favor of the plaintiff for the cost of boarding the horse for five months after May 3, 1962, and for expenses incurred in trimming its hoofs. The plaintiff has appealed, and the defendant has cross-appealed from the judgment entered based on the decision. The trial judge erred in finding an "implied in fact" contract between the parties, as there was no evidence to support it. The plaintiff cannot argue solely on the basis of the trial justice's decision for such a result. The lower court also erred in not considering the conflicting testimony and failing to determine the ownership of the horse.

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua.Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua.Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua.Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua.Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua.Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua.

LSD+ exclusive

This content is exclusively for LSD+ users.

Sign up for LSD+ for full access to the Bailey v. West case brief summary.

Enjoy unlimited access with our 14-day free trial.

🤯 High points 🤯Key points contributed by students on LSD

LSD+ exclusive

This content is exclusively for LSD+ users.

Sign up for LSD+ for full access to the Bailey v. West case brief summary.

Enjoy unlimited access with our 14-day free trial.

LSD+ Case Briefs

Features

  • DeepDive for detailed case analysis
  • Over 50,000 existing case briefs
  • Instant briefs for another 6,000,000 cases
  • Highlight dictionary for legal term definitions
  • Social learning with chat and high points

Over 50,000 Cases Briefed

LSD+ gives you access to over 50,000 case briefs, more than anyone else. Be the first to email us the website of a case brief product that offers you more case briefs and we'll give you a free year of LSD+.

14-Day Free Trial

Unlimited access. Read as much content as you want during your trial with no device limitations. Cancel any time during your trial and keep access for the full 14 days.

Integrated Legal Dictionary

Lawyers and judges love to use big words. And Latin, for some reason.

Highlight a legal term in LSD Briefs and get an instant, plain English definition. Try highlighting contract or specific performance. No need to search or read through a list of definitions, simply highlight the words you don’t know and our LSDefine integration will instantly give you a definition to any of over 30,000 legal terms.

DeepDive

DeepDive allows you to explore legal cases like never before. DeepDive offers multiple levels of case summaries, which empowers you to quickly and easily find the information you need to stay on top of readings. Easily navigate through summary levels and click on any text to get more detail, all the way down to the original legal case text.

Brief anything. Instantly.

Our proprietary state-of-the-art system can instantly brief over 6,000,000 US cases. That means we can probably brief that case that your professor assigned last night when she sent you a poorly scanned pdf and told you to read every third paragraph. Or maybe she uploaded it to Canvas and didn’t really tell you to read it, but you know you probably should. Tenure does wild things to good people.

Social Learning with Chat and High Points

Study groups are a great way to learn and explore a case. LSD has chat rooms for each case to let you ask questions across the community and hear what other students struggled with and how they put it all together. Learn the key points of every case from other LSD+ users and share your knowledge with LSD High Points.

Real-Time Brief Feedback

Don’t settle for mistakes in briefs that have been there for 10 years and never fixed. Find an issue or something missing from a brief? Down vote and we will make improvements. All of our case brief editors graduated from from T14 law schools.

Bailey v. West

Chat for Bailey v. West
brief-47
👍 Chat vibe: 0 👎
Help us make LSD better!
Tell us what's important to you
LSD+ is ad-free, with DMs, discounts, case briefs & more.